People ask -- Rob, Russell, the world is going to hell in a handbasket. What can we do about it? We say -- read one book, see one movie. Unfortunately, the movie and the book are available now only in Canada. But wait -- before you head north of the border -- they will be available here in a month or so. And believe us, it is worth the wait. (Full disclosure -- our work -- the Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the 1990s -- is featured in the movie.)

The movie is called: The Corporation. It is by Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott, and Joel Bakan.

We've seen an advance copy of the movie. We're read an advance copy of the book.

And here's our review:

Scrap the civics curricula in your schools, if they exist. Cancel your cable TV subscriptions. Call your friends, your enemies and your family. Get your hands on a copy of this movie and a copy of this book. Read the book. Discuss it. Dissect it. Rip it apart.

Watch the movie. Show it to your children. Show it to your right-wing relatives. Show it to everyone. Organize a party around it. Then organize another.

For years, we've reported on the defenders of the corporate status quo like Milton Friedman, Peter Drucker and William Niskanen.

But Bakan, a professor of law at British Columbia Law School, and Achbar and Abbott have pulled these leading lights together in a 145-minute documentary that grabs the viewer by the throat and refuses to let go.

The movie is selling out major theaters across Canada. And if it detonates here -- which in our view is still a long shot -- the U.S. after all is not Canada -- it could have a profound impact on politics.

The filmmakers juxtapose well-shot interviews of defenders and critics with the reality on the ground -- Charles Kernaghan in Central America showing how, for example, big apparel manufacturers pay workers pennies for products that sell for hundreds of dollars in the United States -- with defenders of the regime -- Milton Friedman looking frumpy as he says with as straight a face as he can -- the only moral imperative for a corporate executive is to make as much money for the corporate owners as he or she can.

Others agree with Friedman. Management guru Peter Drucker tells Bakan: "If you find an executive who wants to take on social responsibilities, fire him. Fast." And William Niskanen, chair of the libertarian Cato Institute, says that he would not invest in a company that pioneered in corporate responsibility.

Of course, state corporation laws actually impose a legal duty on corporate executives to make money for shareholders. Engage in social responsibility -- pay more money to workers, stop legal pollution, lower the price to customers -- and you'll likely be sued by your shareholders. Robert Monks, the investment manager, puts it this way: "The corporation is an externalizing machine, in the same way that a shark is a killing machine (shark seeking young woman swimming on the screen). There isn't any question of malevolence or of will. The enterprise has within it, and the shark has within it, those characteristics that enable it to do that for which it was designed."

Business insiders like Monks and Ray Anderson, CEO of Interface Corporation, the world's largest commercial carpet manufacturer, lend needed balance to a movie that otherwise would have been dominated by outside critics like Chomsky, Moore, Grossman and Rifkin. Anderson calls the corporation a "present day instrument of destruction" because of its compulsion to "externalize any cost that an unwary or uncaring public will allow it externalize."

"The notion that we can take and take and take and take, waste and waste, without consequences, is driving the biosphere to destruction," Anderson says, as pictures of biological and chemical wastes pouring into the atmosphere roll across the screen.

Like Republican Kevin Phillips is doing as he criss-crosses the nation, pummeling Bush from the right, Anderson and Monks are opening a new front against corporate power from inside the belly of the beast. They are stars of this movie and book.

The movie and the book drive home one fundamental point -- the corporation is a psychopath.

Psychologist Dr. Robert Hare runs down a checklist of psychopathic traits and there is a close match.

The corporation is irresponsible because in an attempt to satisfy the corporate goal, everybody else is put at risk.

Corporations try to manipulate everything, including public opinion. Corporations are grandiose, always insisting that "we're number one, we're the best." Corporations refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions and are unable to feel remorse.And the key to reversing the control of this psychopathic institution is to understand the nature of the beast.

No better place to start than right here. Read the book. Watch the movie (www.thecorporation.tv). Organize for resistance.

Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor. They are co-authors of 'Corporate Predators: The Hunt for MegaProfits and the Attack on Democracy' (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press; http://www.corporatepredators.org).

The following list is an attempt to articulate the obligatory rules by which corporations operate. Some of the rules overlap, but taken together they help reveal why corporations behave as they do and how they have come to dominate their environment and the human beings within it.

The Profit Imperative: Profit is the ultimate measure of all corporate decisions. It takes precedence over community well-being, worker health, public health, peace, environmental preservation or national security. Corporations will even find ways to trade with national "enemies"—Libya, Iran, the former Soviet Union, Cuba—when public policy abhors it. The profit imperative and the growth imperative are the most fundamental corporate drives; together they represent the corporation's instinct to "live."

The Growth Imperative: Corporations live or die by whether they can sustain growth. On this depends relationships to investors, to the stock market, to banks and to public perception. The growth imperative also fuels the corporate desire to find and develop scarce resources in obscure parts of the world.

This effect is now clearly visible, as the world's few remaining pristine places are sacrificed to corporate production. The peoples who inhabit these resource-rich regions are similarly pressured to give up their traditional ways and climb on the wheel of production-consumption. Corporate planners consciously attempt to bring "less developed societies into the modem world" to create infrastructures for development, as well as new workers and new consumers. Corporations claim that they do this for altruistic reasons to raise the living standard—but corporations have no altruism.

Theoretically, privately held corporations—those owned by individuals or families—do not have the imperative to expand. In practice, however, their behavior is the same. Such privately held giants as Bechtel Corporation have shown no propensity to moderate growth.

Competition and Aggression: Corporations place every person in management in fierce competition with each other. Anyone interested in a corporate career must hone his or her ability to seize the moment. This applies to gaining an edge over another company or over a colleague within the company. As an employee, you are expected to be part of the "team," but you also must be ready to climb over your own colleagues.

Corporate ideology holds that competition improves worker incentive and corporate performances and therefore benefits society. Our society has accepted this premise utterly. Unfortunately, however, it also surfaces in personal relationships. Living by standards of competition and aggression on the job, human beings have few avenues to express softer, more personal feelings. (In politics, non-aggressive behavior is interpreted as weakness.)

Amorality: Not being human, corporations do not have morals or altruistic goals. So decisions that maybe antithetical to community goals or environmental health are made without misgivings. In fact, corporate executives praise "non-emotionality" as a basis for "objective" decision-making.

Corporations, however, seek to hide their amorality and attempt to act as if they were altruistic. Lately, there has been a concerted effort by American industry to appear concerned with environmental cleanup, community arts or drug programs. Corporate efforts that seem altruistic are really Public relations ploys or directly self-serving projects.

There has recently been a spurt of corporate advertising about how corporations work to clean the environment. A company that installs offshore oil rigs will run ads about how fish are thriving under the rigs. Logging companies known for their clearcutting practices will run millions of dollars' worth of ads about their "tree farms."

It is a fair rule of thumb that corporations tend to advertise the very qualities they do not have in order to allay negative public perceptions. When corporations say "we care," it is almost always in response to the widespread perception that they do not have feelings or morals.

If the benefits do not accrue, the altruistic pose is dropped. When Exxon realized that its cleanup of Alaskan shores was not easing the public rage about the oil spill, it simply dropped all pretense of altruism and ceased working.

Hierarchy: Corporate laws require that corporations be structured into classes of superiors and subordinated within a centralized pyramidal structure: chairman, directors, chief executive officer, vice presidents, division managers and so on. The efficiency of this hierarchical form (which also characterizes the military, the government and most institutions in our society) is rarely questioned.

The effect on society from adopting the hierarchical form is to make it seem natural that we have all been placed within a national pecking order. Some jobs are better than others, some lifestyles are better than others, some neighborhoods, some races, some kinds of knowledge. Men over women. Westerners over non-Westerners. Humans over nature.

That effective, non-hierarchical modes of organization exist on the planet, and have been successful for millennia, is barely known by most Americans.

Quantification, Linearity, Segmentation: Corporations require that subjective information be translated into objective form, i.e. numbers. The subjective or spiritual aspects of forests, for example, cannot be translated, and so do not enter corporate equations. Forests are evaluated only as "board feet."

When corporations are asked to clean up their smokestack emissions, they lobby to relax the new standards in order to contain costs. The result is that a predictable number of people are expected to become sick and die.

The operative corporate standard is not "as safe as humanly possible," but rather, "as safe as possible commensurate with maintaining acceptable profit."

Dehumanization: In the great majority of corporations, employees are viewed as ciphers, as non-managerial cogs in the wheel, replaceable by others or by machines.

As for management employees, not subject to quite the same indignities, they nonetheless must practice a style of decision making that "does not let feelings get in the way." This applies as much to firing employees as it does to dealing with the consequences of corporate behavior in the environment or the community.

Exploitation: All corporate profit is obtained by a simple formula: Profit equals the difference between the amount paid to an employee and the economic value of the employee's output, and/or the difference between the amount paid for raw materials used in production (including costs of processing), and the ultimate sales price of processed raw materials. Karl Marx was right: a worker is not compensated for full value of his or her labor—neither is the raw material supplier. The owners of capital skim off part of the value as profit. Profit is based on underpayment.

Capitalists argue that this is a fair deal, since both workers and the people who mine or farm the resources (usually in Third World environments) get paid. But this arrangement is inherently imbalanced. The owner of the capital—the corporation or the bank always obtains additional benefit. While the worker makes a wage, the owner of capital gets the benefit of the worker's labor, plus the surplus profit the worker produces, which is then reinvested to produce yet more surplus.

Ephemerality: Corporations exist beyond time and space: they are legal creations that only exist on paper. They do not die a natural death; they outlive their own creators. They have no commitment to locale, employees or neighbors. Having no morality, no commitment to place and no physical nature (a factory, while being a physical entity, is not the corporation). A corporation can relocate all of its operations at the first sign of inconvenience—demanding employees, high taxes and restrictive environmental laws. The traditional ideal of community engagement is antithetical to corporation behavior.

Opposition to Nature: Though individuals who work for corporations may personally love nature, corporations themselves, and corporate societies, are intrinsically committed to intervening in, altering and transforming nature. For corporations engaged in commodity manufacturing, profit comes from transmogrifying raw materials into saleable forms. Metals from the ground are converted into cars.

Trees are converted into boards, houses, furniture and paper products. Oil is converted into energy. In all such energy, a piece of nature is taken from where it belongs and processed into a new form. All manufacturing depends upon intervention and reorganization of nature. After natural resources are used up in one part of the globe, the corporation moves on to another part.

This transformation of nature occurs in all societies where manufacturing takes place. But in capitalist, corporate societies, the process is accelerated because capitalist societies and corporations must grow by extracting resources from nature and reprocessing them at an ever-quickening pace. Meanwhile, the consumption end of the cycle is also accelerated by corporations that have an interest in convincing people that commodities bring material satisfaction. Inner satisfaction, self-sufficiency, contentment in nature or a lack of a desire to acquire wealth are subversive to corporate goals.

Banks finance the conversion of nature insurance companies help reduce the financial risks involved. On a finite planet, the process cannot continue indefinitely.

Homogenization: American rhetoric claims that commodity society delivers greater choice and diversity than other societies. "Choice" in this context means product choice in the marketplace: many brands to choose from and diverse features on otherwise identical products. Actually, corporations have a stake in all of us living our lives in a similar manner, achieving our pleasures from things that we buy in a world where each family lives isolated in a single family home and has the same machines as every other family on the block. The "singles" phenomenon has proved even more productive than the nuclear family, since each person duplicates the consumption patterns of every other person.

Lifestyles and economic systems that emphasize sharing commodities and work, that do not encourage commodity accumulation or that celebrate non-material values, are not good for business. People living collectively, sharing such "hard" goods as washing machines, cars and appliances (or worse, getting along without them) are outrageous to corporate commodity society.

Native societies—which celebrate an utterly non-material relationship to life, the planet and the spirit—are regarded as backward, inferior and unenlightened. We are told that they envy the choices we have. To the degree these societies continue to exist, they represent a threat to the homogenization of worldwide markets and culture. Corporate society works hard to retrain such people in attitudes and values appropriate to corporate goals.

In undeveloped parts of the world, satellite communication introduces Western television and advertising, while improvements in the technical infrastructure speed up the pace of development. Most of this activity is funded by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, as well as agencies such as the US Agency for International Development, the Inter-American Bank and the Asian-American Bank, all of which serve multinational corporate enterprise.

The ultimate goal of corporate multinationals was expressed in a revealing quote by the president of Nabisco Corporation: "One world of homogeneous consumption. . . [I am] looking forward to the day when Arabs and Americans, Latinos and Scandinavians, will be munching Ritz crackers as enthusiastically as they already drink Coke or brush their teeth with Colgate." Page 31

In the book, Trilateralism, editor Holly Sklar wrote: "Corporations not only advertise products, they promote lifestyles rooted in consumption, patterned largely after the United States.... [They] look forward to a post-national age in which [Western] social, economic and political values are transformed into universal values... a world economy in which all national economies beat to the rhythm of transnational corporate capitalism.... The Western way is the good way; national culture is inferior."

Form Is Content Corporations are inherently bold, aggressive and competitive. Though they exist in a society that claims to operate by moral principles, they are structurally amoral. It is inevitable that they will dehumanize people who work for them and the overall society as well. They are disloyal to workers, including their own managers. Corporations can be disloyal to the communities they have been part of for many years. Corporations do not care about nations; they live beyond boundaries. They are intrinsically committed to destroying nature. And they have an inexorable, unabatable, voracious need to grow and to expand. In dominating other cultures, in digging up the Earth, corporations blindly follow the codes that have been built into them as if they were genes.

We must abandon the idea that corporations can reform themselves. To ask corporate executives to behave in a morally defensible manner is absurd. Corporations, and the people within them, are following a system of logic that leads inexorably toward dominant behaviors. To ask corporations to behave otherwise is like asking an army to adopt pacifism.

Excerpted from: IN THE ABSENCE OF THE SACRED: The Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations, Sierra Club Books, 730 Polk St.. San Francisco, CA 94109.

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Far too many organisations are stuffed with sycophants prepared to overlook anything shady, illegal, or unethical as long as they are getting to hang around and share some power. Even if that means pandering to a corporate psychopath.

Leaders need followers, right? It doesn't follow that anyone who doesn't lead is a follower but what if a subset of leaders are psychopathic - or at least antisocial and unburdened by conscience - while a subset of followers are sycophantic - those who are willing to please leaders in exchange for power and privilege, or even the promise or proximity of power and privilege?

What if the two groups are symbiotic? You need those who forgo the respect of self and peers to achieve privilege to be willing to carry out the desires of those psychopaths who have power and no, or little, conscience.

In fact these two groups share much in common. They consider other people and other people's feelings expendable and differ in ways that make them necessary to each other's success.

Identifying psychopaths is both difficult and easy. A mnemonic that can be used to remember the criteria for antisocial personality disorder, ordinarily considered to be the umbrella term that includes psychopaths, is "CORRUPT":

Only three or more of these are viewed as necessary to point towards an antisocial personality disorder, so you can assess yourself and anyone else against the seven criteria – none of which require the individual to have killed anyone!

For those who want to delve deeper, you might want to consider Robert Hare's Psychopathy Checklist, a 20 item evaluation list () that identifies the one per cent of the human race who don't have to struggle with their conscience because it is largely or wholly absent. http://www.hare.org/welcome/

Since organisations generally don't screen for such behavioral traits – particularly not for senior leadership positions - they are more often impressed than appalled (or perhaps both) at the decisiveness of such individuals.

It's something that Kurt Vonnegut, an American novelist "known for works blending satire, black comedy, and science fiction", recognized in his book "A Man Without A Country", where he described leaders gathering around them "upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography" plus "most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or PPs, the medical term for smart, personable people who have no consciences".

"Some people are born deaf, some are born blind or whatever, and this book is about congenitally defective human beings of a sort that is making this whole country and many other parts of the planet go completely haywire nowadays" Vonnegut wrote.

PPs get along because they "are presentable" and because "they are so decisive". And. "unlike normal people, they are never filled with doubts, for the simple reason that they don't give a **** what happens next. Simply can't"

Vonnegut's argument was focused on political leaders but his list of actions that have to be done every single day whatever the cost (and preferably where there is a cost, since the psychopath likes hurting others), is familiar to many who have worked in frenzied environments.

So if Vonnegut was right, or even partially right, that "only nut cases want to be president," to what extent is the same true of corporations?

After all, it is easier to be decisive if you have no empathy for others or fear of consequence. It's also easier to be manipulative if you don't care if you're caught and you get off on the thrill-seeking.

In fact, the more change that is going on, the more fun life is for the psychopath. More sane people need time to think – which leaves them vulnerable to attack - while less attention gets paid to the underlying reasonability and morality of decisions that are being taken.

And how much more so is this if the psychopathic leader is surrounded by sycophants (think Henry Gonzales, embattled US Attorney General, or Harry Whittington, the guy who said how "deeply sorry he was for what US VP Cheney had to go through after Dick had shot Harry in the face).

And just look at all those who are willing to overlook anything shady, illegal, or unethical as long as they are getting to hang around and share some of that power. That's the REAL reason the top team gets spoilt and handpicked.

There's much more to say about the link between psychopaths and sycophants but this is a column not a paper so let's leave it with some questions.

How psychopathic are your leaders? Why not do the test and find out! How sycophantic are his or her nearest supporters? And if you find yourself in a high PS/BS environment – what are you going to do about it?

Being warned is a good start. But what then? Do you pretend to be a psychopath or sycophant, mirroring (but not believing) the behavior that lets people get promoted?

Or do you find another way that neutralizes the sickness or simply lets the empathic among us prosper?

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

1. A president who started two aggressive wars, who bears responsibility for the loss of thousands of American lives along with hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan lives, leaves office as a free man without a felony record or any negative repercussions. 2.

2. Meanwhile, the same populace that has intimate experience with lying politicians appears utterly smitten with a smooth-talking new president promising change and demanding sacrifice. 3.

3. The Congress, which had an approval rate of 14% and which just passed a $700 billion bailout over the objections of a majority of Americans, had a re-election rate exceeding 95%. 4.

4. Untold millions of Americans voice support of military troops as these very people are needlessly killed, injured, and separated from their families and productive work at home. 5.

5. A general populace believed that buying unproductive assets, like housing, could make them wealthy, forever, without any coherent explanation why. 6.

6. Researchers who pursue alternative explanations for AIDS and cancer get their funding cut and have the results of their research squelched, while others who try to improve life by providing healthful foods find themselves under attack.

Overt criminality by leaders and passive, unclear thinking by the proles have become the norm. The two go together, creating a symbiotic ecosystem of tyranny. Fraud, theft, and murder have become widespread, just as the scale of lies told and believed have reached new heights. Irresponsibility has become socialized while people in the honest pursuit of good get thwarted.

Those of us who want little more than peace and freedom don’t run the world. Pursuing freedom contradicts controlling others, so we can reason that people who pursue power have some motivations separate from our own.

I have not fully comprehended the implications of this until recently. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, I had assumed that the people who wield power feel similarly about moral issues as I do—I just couldn’t see why they commit and justify unethical behavior. I already knew that states operate according to a code that the rest of us don’t follow in our own lives. Nevertheless, I assumed that a man who acts without regard to moral laws must feel guilty about it. Then, one day, I stumbled onto this idea: Suppose he doesn’t.

With only small ambitions, he probably behaves like a common criminal, a predator. He lies to gain advantage, uses force to get his way, and steals without conscience. Not feeling guilty about unethical behavior motivates him to instigate further criminal acts.

Small crime operations have one big problem, namely, the risk of getting caught. The prospect of prison appears unappealing, yet even with the high likelihood of arrest and capture during a career, common criminals approach their field with little sophistication and often pay the price. Other like-minded people see ways to avoid these problems. Just as normal people develop interests growing up and figure out how to pursue them at higher levels, a criminal mind can do the same. With greater intelligence and patience, he can pursue an ambitious career of criminality. With this objective in sight, one can easily see the state as the most expedient means to accomplish it.

Once a criminal joins forces with the state by becoming an employee, he can lie to his advantage, use force to get his way, and steal without conscience, just as the small-time operator does. The opportunities for mischief have no limits through thoughtful job selection. For example, if a man took pleasure in making innocent people squirm, he could become a police officer and plant evidence. For another, if he wanted to murder people, he could become a military officer and “accidentally” call in the coordinates of a house he’d like to see bombed. Whatever they do, the state shields them from the natural consequences of their actions. In all likelihood, if smart, they never get caught, never get punished, and probably get commended.

Too often, I have assumed that the people working for the state take the jobs only because of the easy hours and good pay, benefits, and retirement. For the predator, though, it offers all these things with the appetizing fringe benefit of satisfying their criminal urges without the risk of retribution.

It turns out this personality type has a scientific name: psychopathic. Lest you think I merely kid you, I quote from Scientific American:

Superficially charming, psychopaths tend to make a good first impression on others and often strike observers as remarkably normal. Yet they are self-centered, dishonest and undependable, and at times they engage in irresponsible behavior for no apparent reason other than the sheer fun of it. Largely devoid of guilt, empathy and love, they have casual and callous interpersonal and romantic relationships. Psychopaths routinely offer excuses for their reckless and often outrageous actions, placing blame on others instead. They rarely learn from their mistakes or benefit from negative feedback, and they have difficulty inhibiting their impulses.

This seems like a nearly perfect description of those who seek political power. That same article goes on to say that fields over-represented by psychopaths may include “politics, business and entertainment. Yet the scientific evidence for this intriguing conjecture is preliminary.” It turns out that much stronger evidence for this exists than the article lets on.

In the book Political Ponerology, Andrew Lobaczewski claims that about 6% of the people within a population have psychopathic characters. The implications of this, which he recognized soon after World War II, stagger the mind. Moreover, he suggests that another 12% of the population has high susceptibility to psychopathic thought. In a world dominated by hierarchical structures, these people sieze control of the key positions and create a so-called “pathocracy.” Lobaczewski continues, writing in ways that clearly anticipate the current reality:

Within this [pathocratic] system, the common man is blamed for not having been born a psychopath, and is considered good for nothing except hard work, fighting and dying to protect a system of government he can neither sufficiently comprehend nor ever consider to be his own. An ever-strengthening network of psychopathic and related individuals gradually starts to dominate, overshadowing the others.

Normal people have not considered the possibility that some people who seem ordinary could have no moral inhibitions. They default to believing that their leaders have good intentions. Employees of psychopaths thus carry out plans of their bosses blinded to the reality. No matter the scope of the “failure,” the leadership can always point back to their stated good intentions and shield themselves from the gallows. In fact, the more harm they create, the stronger the call becomes to vest more power in their failed agency so they can “prevent” anything of the sort from ever happening again.

Their MO focuses on figuring out how much they can get away with, and we see no signs they have begun to approach the limits the public will accept. Irrespective of the ordeals they create, the vast majority of people give them the benefit of the doubt time and time again and continue in their support of the system. This belief among good people led to the democide of the 20th Century that continues unabated today.

After considering the possibility that psychopaths have taken control of society, we find volumes of evidence to support the hypothesis. Did Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot sympathize with their victims or have any sense of guilt? More recently, among Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, or Clinton , can we point to one who even exhibits a façade resembling normality? Obviously not—these lists name one person after another who has zero accountability to a rational morality. If people like this could make their way to the highest levels of power, what does that say about lower offices?

It suggests people like this have control over the levers of power everywhere. We live at a time when the population at large cannot achieve its wants, yet few seem to know why. As one example, polls consistently indicate that educational matters concern the public, yet decade after decade, schooling gets quantitatively worse. What a mystery! Evidently, if we believe our well-meaning masters, 2,000 years of Western civilization has not yet determined effective ways to transmit key knowledge to younger generations. However, what happens if we suspend our belief in their benevolence for a moment and consider other possibilities? If schools fail to achieve their stated goals over several decades, might some groups see this as a success?

Inhibiting critical thinking in the masses obviously benefits the state and psychopaths. When overtly self-serving, irresponsible, illegal, immoral, irrational behavior gets treated as normal, we can conclude that the educational system works quite well for our masters. I have given but one example, yet the multitude of state functions exists to provide every variety of psychopathic interest with a job. Moreover, we should consider that the state not only acts like a recruitment center for psychopaths, but that psychopaths probably invented the state to take advantage of the rest of us. I can give you no better explanation for the existence of an organization that fails in every ethical dimension and invokes psychopathic thinking at every turn than this.

Our battle for liberty appears not just as a conflict between those who want freedom versus those who want control, but instead as the battle between normal people and the psychopaths. I have found incredible explanatory power of our world within the psychopathic hypothesis: The world feels wrong because psychopaths run it. In a country trained to discount and ridicule all ideas more than a standard deviation from the average, coherent explanations of observable social phenomena don’t get much press. Without understanding physical laws, we would never have gained the massive improvements in our quality of life from technological developments. Similarly, without understanding our social systems, we will never escape from the tyranny unleashed on us by psychopaths. We should spread the word and explore this rich vein of thought with vigor.

I think it is safe to say this started before Bush jr, however 911 was the incident (they caused) they needed to put their plans on fast track.

Logged

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it

is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new

Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its

"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes. . . . A wise man fears, and departs from evil: but the fool rages and is confident." -- Proverbs

Can an entire country go mad? Of course it can!

And history provides many examples: the Salem Colony during the witch trials (and its 20th century counterpart, the McCarthy mania), Nazi Germany, Cambodia under Pol Pot, and arguably the United States under George Bush.

Worse yet, most people living at a time of national derangement, perceive that condition as perfectly normal, and even “moral.” And pity the poor soul who sees things differently: the “one-eyed person in the land of the blind.” http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/wonderland.htm

If we are even to suggest that the American public has, by and large, gone bonkers, we should begin with a definition of “sanity” and, by implication, of “insanity.”

Perhaps Sigmund Freud said it best: a sane person is someone with an operating “reality principle” – someone who checks his beliefs against the readily-available promptings of “the real world.”

Of course, each and every one of us falls short of complete congruence with “reality” – it’s the price we pay for our finitude, our mortality.

“Sanity” does not mean perfection; it merely means sufficient commerce with the real world to allow us to survive both day-by-day and in the long term – thus “sane” individuals obey traffic laws, learn from their mistakes and practical experience and, in the case of moral sanity, they recognize in others their worth and their capacity for joy and suffering. Furthermore, sanity implies a capacity to critically evaluate one’s experience, to distinguish fact from fiction, and to further adapt to the real world through that experience and knowledge.

Insanity, by implication, suggests a kind of “habitation” in an unreal, made-up world. The megalomaniac who believes he is Napoleon, to put it bluntly, is not Napoleon. The schizophrenic hears voices that nobody in fact utters. The paranoid is in constant fear of non-existent threats. The psychopath can not recognize the human worth and the capacity for pleasure and pain in others, and so on.

A deranged society is often, but surely not always, made so by a deranged leadership. This is especially likely when that leadership has effective control of the media. Then the leaders possess the means to convey their delusions to much of the public at large.

Now I don’t wish to claim that one George Bush has lost all his marbles, though I suspect that he may be “a few bulbs short of a full marquee” (Garrison Keilor). George Bush’s “world” may, to a disturbing degree, be out of sync with the real world.

That’s a startling charge to level at “our leader” and, by extension, at our compatriots. So let’s look at the evidence:

“National Solipsism”“Solipsism” is the philosopher’s term for the assertion that “all that exists is my mind and its ideas.” It is epitomized by the opening sentence in one of Arthur Schopenhauer’s books: “the world is my idea.” Of course, no sane person believes this (including Schopenhauer). However, the challenge of “escaping solipsism” leads to the core issues of epistemology: how do we demonstrate the existence of other minds and of an independent “outside” physical world. (My late friend, the novelist Edward Abbey, had an ingenious solution: “if someone tells you he is a solipsist, throw a rock at his head. If he ducks, he is a liar.”)

Now, of course, Bush and his gang are not solipsists, and the term, “national solipsism” is meant figuratively. (Literally, the term is self-contradictory – “national” entails a plurality of minds).

In this figurative (and I suspect original) sense, “national solipsism” is a belief, still better an “attitude,” that the world beyond our borders is just what I want it to be and believe it to be, and nothing more. To Bush and his neo-con “handlers,” ours is an uncomplicated world free of unintended consequences. This world need not be studied in order to be understood – the opinions of “experts” are of no interest. Rather, the state of the world is best apprehended by “gut feeling.” So we are free to violate a batch of treaties, to defy the United Nations, and to invade an unthreatening country. And what will the excluded “community of nations” think of this behavior? How will the Arabic and Islamic nations react? Can they retaliate in any troublesome way? We don’t know and we don’t care. Anyhow, we can always bribe or bully our way through, as we did when we collected the “coalition of the willing.” In brief, in the world of the “national solipsists,” our nation is the sole actor; all other nations are completely passive.

Case in point: Syria. When asked “what is the message of the Iraqi attack” to other countries in the region, Richard Perle casually said: “you’re next!” To Perle and others of like mind, the governments of Syria, Iran, North Korea, or wherever, upon hearing this and contemplating the fate of Iraq and its leader Saddam, will simply passively await their fate in fear and dread, making no alliances or other preparations that might surprise us. Instead, they will wait helplessly, like condemned prisoners in their cells, awaiting the sentence of the court.

And that kind of an assumption is just plain crazy.

In point of rational fact, the remark “You’re next!” must surely provoke strategic planning in Syria, etc., and for that matter in numerous nations throughout the world. Similarly, reactive strategic planning is the certain response abroad to the Bush regime’s flagrant violation of treaties, and its disregard of international law and institutions. We are not the only nation on earth with “national interests” to attend to, although the neo-cons behave as if this were so.

Suppose one were to directly confront Perle, or Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld with the question, “Do you really believe that other countries will stand idly and passively by as they contemplate the fate of Iraq, as they read the text of ‘Project for a New American Century,’ and as they hear that taunting remark, ‘you’re next’?” Surely they would reply, quite truthfully, that they don’t really believe in the complete passivity of nations abroad. But the essential point is that they act as if they believed this! Provocative remarks (‘you’re next!”), violations of treaties, habitual lying, unprovoked attacks upon harmless and disarmed countries – all this is done by the Bush team as if they firmly believed that the U.S. government and its military can do whatever it damned pleases, without fear of “surprises” and retaliation from other regimes and non-governmental organizations such as al Qaeda.

In short, their beliefs in rational reflective moments are fundamentally disconnected from their actions and their policies. And that is clinically insane behavior. Moreover, to the degree that this disconnection between certifiable knowledge (“justified-true-belief”) and operative foreign policy doctrine infects the general public, via the “vector” of a compliant media, that public “catches” a bad case of the crazies from its government.

Sooner or later, the Bushistas and the American public will find out, to their astonishment and chagrin, that “the world” beyond will not tolerate this behavior much longer, and moreover, that the community of nations, comprising the “other” 95% of the world’s population, is quite capable of devastating, albeit non-military, retaliation.

Science be damned -- “the world is my idea”

Solipsism, or “subjectivism gone mad,” is reflected in Bush’s attitude toward science, and in the consequent policies of his administration. According to the Bushevik subjective metaphysic, the physical world is also just what we want it to be, scientific expertise and proof be damned. And so, when the threat of global warming is affirmed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, consisting of 2000 of the leading atmospheric scientists of the world, and when the IPCC findings are confirmed by the National Academy of Sciences, the Bush regime responds by “shooting the messenger” – by arranging the firing of the IPCC Chairman, Thomas Watson. Furthermore, the Bush EPA then removes a section on climate change from its annual report. Similarly, Bush energy policy is apparently based on the belief that petroleum reserves are infinite – contrary to scientific information and economic statistics. . “We don’t want to believe what the scientists tell us, so it ain’t so.”

Economics is not a “hard science” – to say the least of it. Nonetheless, there are a few compelling economic principles that are ignored at the peril of society. One is that huge deficits far into the future, with no indication of reversal, leads inexorably to fiscal collapse. Another principle is that the way to “stimulate” an economy is to direct funds to those who will spend and/or invest in the near future (that’s most of us), and not to those who will send these funds to offshore banks or to set up low-wage industries abroad (i.e., to the fortunate top 2%). But never mind all that. George Bush has “a promise to keep” – to his political contributors. And, at least in this case, he keeps his promises.

Another bit of economic lunacy: “Compulsive behavior” – persisting in an activity that has clearly been shown to be useless or even counter-productive – is a compelling indicator of some loose screws in the cognitive clockwork. In extreme cases, it calls for strait-jackets and padded cells. Now consider “supply-side,” “trickle-down” economic policies (i.e., “reverse Robin-Hoodism" – throwing money at the rich), which proved to be a colossal failure during the Reagan and Bush-I administrations. When Bill Clinton dumped “supply side,” two conservative Texas Professors of Economics, (and Senator and Congressman respectively) Dr. Phil Gramm and Dr. Richard Armey, predicted economic disaster. Instead, there followed eight years of unprecedented growth and prosperity. But never mind that, with Bush the Sequel we get supply side, the sequel. Experience refutes supply-side economics, and eight Nobel Laureate economists have denounced it. But so what? George Bush’s “gut” says otherwise, therefore “supply side” theory is true.

Psychopathology: “Who cares what you think?”

Psychopathy – the failure to recognize, much less to empathize with, the personal human dignity, rights, and feelings of others, is displayed in the Bush administration de-funding of Medicare, Social Security, veterans’ benefits, and furthermore, in the callous disregard of the lives and safety of the unfortunate Iraqis beneath the U.S. military’s cruise-missiles, shells, and bombs. Sure enough, the Bush word-smiths recognize compassion as a politically potent concept – hence “Compassionate Conservatism.” But the astute citizen will (untypically) follow Richard Nixon’s advice: “don’t pay attention to what [they] say, pay attention to what [they] do.”

“The Truth is Out There”

The Bush administration has an uncanny ability to concoct lies and, when “found out,” to “move on” unscathed. This accomplishment stands as a tribute to their mastery of the black arts of public relations and propaganda.

Consider the “justifications” for the attack on Iraq – in particular, those presented by Colin Powell to the UN Security Council. (a) Saddam Hussein is producing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), and (b) Saddam Hussein is in close cahoots with al Qaeda terrorists. As it turns out, the case for WMDs was based on a collapsing structure of plagiarized term papers, forged documents, rumors and false reports, even as the UN inspectors were failing to find any independent evidence of WMDs. And even the CIA reported that there was no evidence linking Saddam with al Qaeda. Furthermore, it was a plain verifiable fact that none of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi. And yet, so effective is the Bush propaganda machine, that a majority of the American public now believes that Saddam had WMDs “at the ready,” and that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Significantly, the corporate media has taken no great pains to disabuse the public of these flat-out misconceptions.

In other words, the American public’s “reality principle” was, in these cases, deliberately and effectively sabotaged, resulting in a case of mass-derangement.

And yet, “the truth is out there.” The facts about Saddam, WMDs, al Qaeda, 9/11 are not secret, nor are the opinions of atmospheric scientists, petroleum geologists. The opinions of world-renowned economists are on the record, and if that doesn’t suffice, the economic statistics – unemployment, consumer confidence, inventories, stock prices, etc. – are published for all to see.

Yet, to the neo-conservative and fundamentalist dogmatists in the Bush administration, none of this matters. “Screw reality, we have our doctrine – and we have the interests of our ‘sponsors’ to tend to.”

Likewise, although the facts are out there in front of the eyes of the public, yet they refuse to see. Meanwhile, the subservient corporate media have instituted a successful campaign of “mass distraction,” while the Congress and the Courts are no help, since they no longer work for “We the People.”

Corruption and despotism, like cockroaches, scurry for cover when the light is cast upon them. Thus the most dependable route out of this pit that we the people find ourselves in, is the route prescribed by Thomas Jefferson and fellow founders of our republic: a free and diverse media, a vigorous and well-funded system of education, and the resulting open discussion of competing ideas. Unfortunately, now that the corporate media at home have abandoned us, we must now look to the foreign press and the internet for our news and information.

So wake up, America. Reality calls!

And reality won't budge an inch to accommodate our fantasies.

Dr. Ernest Partridge is a philosopher with a specialty in moral philosophy (ethics) and environmental ethics, who resides in the San Bernardino mountains, east of Los Angeles, CA. He has taught at several campuses of the University of California and at the University of Colorado. He is the editor and sole writer of the website, The Online Gadfly. He is also co-editor of The Crisis Papers with Bernard Weiner, where this essay first appeared ( http://www.crisispapers.org ).

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

It is not clear what some students at South Hadley High School expected to achieve by subjecting a freshman to the relentless taunting described by a prosecutor and classmates.

Certainly not her suicide. And certainly not the multiple felony indictments announced on Monday against several students at the Massachusetts school.

The prosecutor brought charges Monday against six teenagers, saying their taunting and physical threats were beyond the pale and led the freshman, Phoebe Prince, to hang herself from a stairwell in January.

The charges were an unusually sharp legal response to the problem of adolescent bullying, which is increasingly conducted in cyberspace as well as in the schoolyard and has drawn growing concern from parents, educators and lawmakers.

In the uproar around the suicides of Ms. Prince, 15, and an 11-year-old boy subjected to harassment in nearby Springfield last year, the Massachusetts legislature stepped up work on an anti-bullying law that is now near passage. The law would require school staff members to report suspected incidents and principals to investigate them. It would also demand that schools teach about the dangers of bullying. Forty-one other states have anti-bullying laws of varying strength.

In the Prince case, two boys and four girls, ages 16 to 18, face a different mix of felony charges that include statutory rape, violation of civil rights with bodily injury, harassment, stalking and disturbing a school assembly.

Appearing with state and local police officials on Monday, Ms. Scheibel said that Ms. Prince’s suicide came after nearly three months of severe taunting and physical threats by a cluster of fellow students.

“The investigation revealed relentless activities directed toward Phoebe to make it impossible for her to stay at school,” Ms. Scheibel said. The conduct of those charged, she said, “far exceeded the limits of normal teenage relationship-related quarrels.”

It was particularly alarming, the district attorney said, that some teachers, administrators and other staff members at the school were aware of the harassment but did not stop it. “The actions or inactions of some adults at the school were troublesome,” Ms. Scheibel said, but did not violate any laws.

Christine Swelko, assistant superintendent for South Hadley Public Schools, said school officials planned to meet with the district attorney this week or next. “We will then review this evidence and particularly the new information which the district attorney’s office has but did not come to light within the investigation conducted by the school,” Ms. Swelko said in a statement.

Ms. Prince’s family had recently moved to the United States from a small town in Ireland, and she entered South Hadley last fall. The taunting started when she had a brief relationship with a popular senior boy; some students reportedly called her an “Irish slut,” knocked books out of her hands and sent her threatening text messages, day after day.

At South Hadley High School, which has about 700 students, most students and teachers refused on Monday to talk about the case. Students waited for parents in the pouring rain and a sports team ran by, with one student telling reporters, “Go away.”

Ashlee Dunn, a 16-year-old sophomore, said she had not known Ms. Prince personally but had heard stories spread about her in the hallways.

“She was new and she was from a different country, and she didn’t really know the school very well,” Ms. Dunn said. “I think that’s probably one reason why they chose Phoebe.”

On Jan. 14, the investigation found, students abused her in the school library, the lunchroom and the hallways and threw a canned drink at her as she walked home. Her sister found her hanging from a stairwell at home, still in her school clothes, at 4:30 p.m.

Some of the students plotted against Ms. Prince on the Internet, using social networking sites, but the main abuse was at school, the prosecutor said.

“The actions of these students were primarily conducted on school grounds during school hours and while school was in session,” Ms. Scheibel said.

Ms. Scheibel declined to provide details about the charges of statutory rape against two boys, but experts said those charges could mean that the boys had sex with Ms. Prince when she was under age.

Legal experts said they were not aware of other cases in which students faced serious criminal charges for harassing a fellow student, but added that the circumstances in this case appeared to be extreme and that juvenile charges were usually kept private.

The Massachusetts House and Senate have passed versions of an anti-bullying law, but disagreement remains on whether all schools will be required to conduct staff training about bullying — a provision in about half the states with such laws and one that is vital, said Robert O. Trestan, Eastern States Civil Rights Counsel of the Anti-Defamation League, which has led the effort for legislation in Massachusetts.

The prospective law, Mr. Trestan said, is aimed at changing school cultures and preventing bullying, but would not label bullying a crime because it is a vague concept. “These indictments tell us that middle school and high school kids are not immune from criminal laws,” he said. “If they violate them in the course of bullying someone, they’ll be held accountable. We don’t need to create a new crime.”

A South Hadley parent, Mitch Brouillard, who said his daughter Rebecca had been bullied by one of the girls charged in Ms. Prince’s death, said he was pleased that charges were brought. One of the students was charged separately in a case involving his daughter.

“My daughter was bullied for three years, and we continually went to the administration and we really got no satisfaction,” Mr. Brouillard said, adding, “I was offered an apology a few weeks ago that they should have handled it differently.”

The school has convened an anti-bullying task force, which met Monday, to help determine how to deal with bullying. “That’s the really clear message we’re trying to send — if you see anything at all, online, through friends, you have to tell us,” said Bill Evans, an administrator leading a group subcommittee.

The task force must also consider whether state law affects existing procedures. “The big question out there is what the legislature will impose on school districts,” Mr. Evans said.

Harvey Silverglate, a lawyer in Cambridge, Mass., who has argued that proposed cyberbullying laws are too vague and a threat to free speech, said that he thought the charges announced Monday would pass legal muster. The sorts of acts of harassment and stalking claimed in the charges were wrong under state law, Mr. Silverglate said, but a question would be whether they were serious enough to constitute criminal violations, as opposed to civil ones.

“There is a higher threshold of proof of outrageous conduct needed to reach the level of a criminal cause of action, in comparison to the lower level of outrageousness needed to prove a civil violation,” he said.

A lawsuit involving another case of high school bullying, in upstate New York, was settled on Monday. A gay teenager had sued the Mohawk Central School District, saying school officials had not protected him.

In the settlement, the district said it would increase staff training to prevent harassment, pay $50,000 to the boy’s family and reimburse the family for counseling, The Associated Press reported. The boy has moved to a different district.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/03/29/massachusetts.bullying.suicide/index.htmlProsecutor: 9 teens charged in bullying that led to girl's suicide - March 30, 2010 ...In the indictments, returned Friday but not made public until Monday, the Hampshire County grand jury charged 17-year-old Sean Mulveyhill of South Hadley with statutory rape, violation of civil rights with bodily injury resulting, criminal harassment and disturbance of a school assembly.

Kayla Narey, 17, of South Hadley, was charged with violation of civil rights with bodily injury resulting, criminal harassment and disturbance of a school assembly.

Charges against another three girls included violation of civil rights with bodily injury resulting; two were also charged with stalking.

Three other girls from South Hadley were named in four delinquency complaints from Hampshire Franklin Juvenile Court. Their charges included violation of civil rights with bodily injury resulting, criminal harassment and disturbance of a school assembly, violation of civil rights, criminal harassment and assault by means of a dangerous weapon. One of the juveniles was charged in a separate complaint involving a second victim, Scheibel said.

The bullying of Prince was common knowledge to most of the student body and to certain faculty, staff and administrators, Scheibel said. At least four students and two faculty members had intervened during the harassment, but the school's code of conduct was inconsistently enforced, she said.

Though the faculty, staff and administrators' behavior was not deemed criminal, "the actions, or inactions, of some adults at the school are troublesome," she said.

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

A Psychopath needs to practice human traits, emotions, etc. Just pay close attention to Obama when he gives his speeches, they are exactly the same tone, mannerisms, depth of the voice on certain issues, that smile when needed, etc. Soertro didn't become skilled by himself, he was mentored, trained, by the finest in the business. Most people invision a physcopath as a madman hidden in an alley drooling and waiting for a target. In reality they are on the telly (on stage) every day, well hidden behind their titles, settings, clothing and praticed human behavior. They fully realize the extent of the cruelty they commit, power is the fuel to their inner needs, fame and fortune follow, rising above the common man in the firm beleif we are inferior. A simple Con Artist exibits the same traits, deception to these parasites is an ego trip.P.S. Intelligent Physcopaths are very difficult to catch, the average man generally takes another on face value, position, dress, etc. The perfect postioning for one these *&%$* is right in front of us, in high position with all of the trappings, be they in the Gov. military, police, etc..Rest assured they get high on their power over the peons.

Many victims of psychopaths and other character disturbed individuals struggle with the fact that their partners first start the relationship off by idealizing then and devaluing them and then when the relationship is over is walk away as if it never existed. They are left with an emptiness. Either way if their partner doesn’t leave them the victim may be left with no other choice but to end the relationship and then feel bad for having done it unless of course they realise their ex is disordered. No matter which way the relationship ends its always messy and left with unfinished business that cannot be resolved like a “normal” relationship. Often it just takes only one person to take responsbility and say sorry and even though the relationship is over at least both parties can move on....

But how many of us who have been out with pathological people ended up saying sorry just to keep the peace even when it’s not our fault.

The psychopath, narcissist and even borderline personality rarely if ever says sorry. If they do say sorry it is usually only because they have been caught out in a lie or because you are onto them. They may apologise but you can be pretty sure they will already be lining up a new source of narcissistic supply if they feel their game is up. Mostly the relationships are about power and control and getting one over on their victims. In an effort to gain back some control they may sometimes take desperate measures. This is why victims of character disturbed individuals really need to pay attention to their safety especially if their has been signs of possible violence towards the end of the relationship in case things become unpredictable.

People who are genuinely sorry learn by their mistakes, and do not repeat their actions. character disturbed individuals do not. This is why so many victims say but my ex says sorry all the time but then keep on doing the same thing over and over again....Once a victim starts to get their head around the dynamics of the relationship that was never a relationship in the first place they will soon learn that a genuine heart-felt sorry from a psychopath, sociopath, narcissist or borderline will NEVER be forthcoming. Never will any of these disordered individuals have the capacity to understand the pain they have caused to their victims. Due to the sense of grandiosity and entitlement they will think that the victims “had it coming” “they deserved it” “they were misunderstood” and so on....

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

The story has links to Masonic lodges, underage prostitutes, a Belgian pimp, places connected to the Dutroux affair, and hotels in the USA.

Police Chief, Jean-Christophe Lagarde

The police chief reportedly organised the orgy with Strauss-Kahn in a Paris hotel.The police chief reportedly accompanied prostitutes to New York to meet up with Strauss-Kahn.The allegations emerged during a police inquiry into a child prostitution racket in Lille in France.Lagarde is a departmental commissioner in France's national police force.A prostitute has told police that Lagarde and Strauss-Kahn organised the orgy in the spring of 2010 'in a duplex suite of a luxury central Paris hotel'.

Dutroux provided girls for top people.

Journal du Dimanche has seen police inquiry documents.Journal du Dimanche reports that the prostitute ring provided girls for luxury French hotels, including the Carlton in Lille, and for hotels in the USA.Girls are thought to have been selected for Strauss-Kahn by an alleged pimp called Dominique Alderweireld (aka Dodo).Dodo lives in Belgium, the home of Marc Dutroux, who reportedly provided young girls for NATO's elite.Dodo reportedly made several trips to the USA.

The people who blew the whistle on the underage prostitution racket, involving the Carlton Hotel in Lille, include a "commission" in Belgium and anonymous information linked to disputes between Masonic lodges in Lille.

Dutroux territory

Involved in the story is René Kojfer, 70, a "public relations" person at the Carlton Hotel.Kojfer is linked to a Freemason temple (the Grand Orient) in Lille.Kojfer knows Dodo.Dodo is reportedly linked to a dozen brothels in the area around Tournai and Mons, in Belgium.Reportedly, Kojfer has sent clients of the Carlton Hotel to these brothels.Reportedly, Dodo's prostitutes have come to work at the Carlton Hotel and two other hotels in Lille.Dodo (Alderweireld) is reportedly involved with underage prostitutes.

Victims of Dutroux

Emmanuel Riglaire is a lawyer and rising star of the Bar in Lille. He has been remanded in custody.A construction contractor, David Roquet, has been detained.Five police officials, including three retired, are the focus of investigations.

Might DSK's embrace of his reputation for libertinism be a sly manipulation of what people like to imagine elites get up to?

Dominique Strauss-Kahn is out defending his virtue. He says he is only guilty of lust and not of turpitude, that the international sex parties that were thrown in his honor (quite apart from the accusations that he attacked a hotel maid in New York) have a long tradition among men of a certain rank.

This raises two interesting questions: can a politician, even a French politician, actually try to explain and justify sexual desire? And how different is the sex that powerful people have from what you and I have?...In essence, Strauss-Kahn is making an Eyes Wide Shut defense. The 1999 Stanley Kubrick film attempted to link power and sex, high-class social rituals and eroticism. This was eroticism as might exist in the minds of fashion-conscious social climbers: wealthy people going to elegant dinners and having sex with each other, in masks.

Strauss-Kahn's version is very close to this; says the New York Times about the DSK parties:

"The exclusive orgies called "parties fines" – lavish champagne affairs costing around $13,000 each – were organized as a roving international circuit from Paris to Washington by businessmen seeking to ingratiate themselves with Mr Strauss-Kahn."

In the description of one source cited by the Times:

"There was a rhythm to the gatherings, with everyone dressed for a sit-down dinner … Then over time, couples separated, 'kisses were exchanged between one woman and another and between a husband and the wife of a friend' until the guests 'all ended up nude.'"

Strauss-Kahn's defense falls back on the peculiarly French, noting his country's history of "libertinage". But it is also something of a white paper about the culture of male desire – or, at least, that of powerful men. He admits to the proud place that lust occupies in his life and outlines its extensive rituals and activities. Rather innocently, he says that he "long thought that I could lead my life as I wanted, and that includes free behavior between consenting adults. There are numerous parties that exist like this in Paris, and you would be surprised to encounter certain people."...

http://12160.info/page/former-imf-head-dominique-strauss-kahn-lived-a-decadent-lifestyle?xg_source=activityformer IMF head, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, lived a decadent lifestyle straight out of Stanley Kubrick’s final film Eyes Wide Shut...As we see in this amazing article from the NY Times, former IMF head, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, lived a decadent lifestyle straight out of Stanley Kubrick’s final film Eyes Wide Shut (which was clearly a warning about the perversion rampant within the elite class). I am not judging his lifestyle so much as saying that when the most powerful leaders in the financial world are behaving like this they are incapable of ever doing the right thing because they are compromised and can be blackmailed into anything. I will allow these quotes from the article speak for themselves.

That defense and the investigation, which is facing a critical judicial hearing in late November, have offered a keyhole view into a clandestine practice in certain powerful circles of French society: secret soirees with lawyers, judges, police officials, journalists and musicians that start with a fine meal and end with naked guests and public sex with multiple partners. (Sounds like a description of the Bilderberg group!)

The exclusive orgies called “parties fines” — lavish Champagne affairs costing around $13,000 each — were organized as a roving international circuit from Paris to Washington by businessmen seeking to ingratiate themselves with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Some of that money, according to a lawyer for the main host, ultimately paid for prostitutes because of a shortage of women at the mixed soirees orchestrated largely for the benefit of Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who sometimes sought sex with three or four women.

At L’Aventure, Mr. Strauss-Kahn and a few friends gathered in a private basement club, carpeted in purple and black tiger stripes, with a female Belgian escort and Mr. Alderweireld’s companion, Béatrice Legrain, who recalled that lunch in an interview.

The investigation into the prostitution ring in Lille ultimately swept up 10 suspects, including Mr. Strauss-Kahn. They knew each other largely through their membership as French Freemasons, according to Karl Vandamme, a defense lawyer who represents Fabrice Paszkowski, the owner of a medical supply company who played a crucial role in organizing the sex parties.

Ladies and gentlemen, you have been introduced to the leaders of the free world…and we are supposed to believe the IMF is going to save us?

By wmw_admin on March 31, 2012 ...In one text to a businessman friend, who has also been charged, he wrote: ‘Do you want to (can you?) come to a great sexy nightclub in Madrid with me (and some equipment) on July 4?’

And in a series of messages sent to men accused of hiring prostitutes for him, he referred to girls as ‘a bit of stuff’ and ‘little thing’.

In one text Strauss-Kahn asked: ‘Are you bringing anything in your luggage?’...The 62-year-old economist is accused of knowingly using prostitutes paid for by two businessmen, who illegally used company funds to organise orgies in Europe and America.

If found guilty he would face up to 20 years in prison.

In interviews with investigators released earlier a French prostitute gave police details of ‘bestial’ orgies attended by the disgraced banker and his friends.

The hooker told police it ‘was rare to find men who showed as little respect for girls’ as the shamed former IMF chief – saying how she was pinned down by the wrists to perform degrading sex acts by one of his alleged cohorts....

Brothel keepers Dominique Alderweirel, also known as Dodo La Saumure, and his partner Béatrice Legrain made their claims in an interview in today's Spanish edition of Vanity Fair....She also said that the former International Monetary Chief had attacked her during the party. 'I got up to go to the bathroom and DSK followed me and in a passageway he grabbed me by my throat and said 'it's you who I want',' she added....Alderweirel, 63, made headlines when he was named as the massage parlour boss who provided the shamed economist with a string of call girls.

He has also been accused of flying a prostitute to the IMF headquarters in Washington DC and arranging orgies for Strauss-Kahn, 62, in cities around the world.

During a court hearing yesterday, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the now resigned, former director of the International Monetary Fund, was released from Rikers Island jail. Strauss-Kahn posted bail, $1 million in cash, as well as a bond for an additional $5 million dollars. He must also pay some $200,000 per month for a private security firm to keep him under house arrest at a swanky upper-Eastside apartment while wearing an electronic tether. Strauss-Kahn is charged with sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment of a maid from the Sofitel Hotel at Times Square. The allegations of his misconduct were followed by claims from a French journalist, whom alleges that the former IMF chief had once assaulted her as well.

A story in the New York Times yesterday tells of how there may well be a climate of sexual misconduct at the IMF headquarters in Washington, DC

Their offices have diplomatic immunity, much like a foreign embassy, where the laws of the United States do not apply.

The NY Times story cites former IMF officials and employees that claim of alleged incidents that may have been encouraged by the IMF′s own policies, which allow managers to pursue women subordinates.

Carmen M. Reinhart, an economist who worked for the IMF from 2001 till 2003, referred to the office environment as “It’s sort of like ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’”.

| - - - -

The IMF in D.C. needs a a major cleanup and upgrade after all the Orgies - (Don't pull out the UV lights just yet!!!)

Critics sceptical of fund's plans for its Washington offices after Irish crisisby Larry Elliott The Observer, Saturday 18 December 2010

The IMF has said that it's Washington DC headquarters are in need of 'essential' refurbishment.

...Fresh from imposing tough conditions on Ireland as the price of its bailout, the International Monetary Fund's bureaucrats plan to concentrate on a matter closer to home in the new year – sprucing up their offices in downtown Washington DC.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the fund's managing director, quietly announced last week that he would be asking permission from the organisation's cash-strapped member states to refurbish its main headquarters building.

An IMF spokesman said the work was an essential overhaul of the 40-year-old premises and compared it to the need to put a new engine in a 20-year-old car. "This is about the heating, the ventilation, the air-conditioning," he said. "This is work that can't be postponed."

Pressure groups greeted the news with scepticism, pointing out that eight years ago the fund spent $150m on a second building, complete with external waterfall, after saying its original site – known as HQ1 – was no longer big enough for its staff of highly-paid international officials.

They said the fund was now flush with cash after selling some of its stock of gold and extracting fees and interest payments from troubled countries such as Ireland and Greece.

Melinda St Louis, deputy director of Jubilee USA Network said: "At this precarious time for the world's poor, the IMF has just earned at least $2bn [£1.2bn] in extra cash from gold sales and now proposes upgrading its already opulent office building in Washington DC.

"Should the IMF get another stunning fountain at its headquarters or should countries in sub-Saharan Africa receive debt relief to invest in clean water for the most vulnerable? Rather than building more marble staircases in DC, the IMF should share its wealth with poor countries that desperately need those funds to build rural health clinics, schools and basic infrastructure."...

The IMF owns and occupies two Class A headquarters office buildings encompassing approximately 3 million gross square feet in the heart of downtown Washington, DC, just three blocks from the White House.

In addition, the IMF owns an extended stay apartment building used by its [ SEX WORKERS, ] teaching Institute, a recreation facility used by many international agencies, and leases nearly 200 residential and commercial office properties around the world. The Fund's Facilities Management Division (FMD) is responsible for managing these facilities and provides a wide range of facilities-related services that support the Fund's core mission and influences its bottom line.

Occupants for the IMF Concordia Hotel will include extended stay visitors for the International Monetary Fund Training Institute, the World Bank and other companies. The owners will be ARAMARK Harrison Lodging.

The IMF wants to clean up its hotel image. No, not the mental image of DSK in a hotel room (eww), but its image in Dupont Circle-West End, where it has run a nondescript apartment-hotel since 1991 for visiting professionals from the IMF and World Bank. The stately location - a visible corner 2 blocks from Dupont Circle at 21st and New Hampshire Ave. - may offer a convenient respite for employees, kitchenettes and multilingual staff, but its tired structure needs a reinvention befitting its international clientele.

To that end, the IMF will gut and refit the 10-story structure, now with 100 apartment units, into a more contemporary visage, taking the same shape as the existing edifice, and sell the smaller of the two buildings that now make up the Concordia Hotel. The IMF will employ Washington D.C. architects Bonstra | Haresign to redesign the '60's motif by gutting the building and keeping the existing concrete frame.

The IMF will sell off the Bond Building (see picture below), now accounting for 78 of the 178 units of the Concordia and connected on the ground floor. Initial plans are for a LEED Gold certified building that will slightly increase the interior space with the same footprint, gaining additional units over the current 100-unit configuration, adding rooftop amenities for residents. The Concordia, appraised by the DC government for $58m, was designed in 1965 by Berla & Able who, in a more inspired moment, also designed the Omni Shoreham hotel in Woodley Park.

Next door, Bonstra | Haresign's designs are already coming to fruition. The architects designed a pavilion that will add more retail to the corner of New Hampshire and M Streets in the West End, where Meiwah now sits. Construction is about midway to completion.

Even if the thought of DSK makes the idea of staying in an IMF hotel unappealing, at least the avenue will get what is expected to be an upgrade, erasing one more '60's building.

Building permits have not yet been issued for the project.

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

As previously established, Randy Quaid and his wife Evi think an evil cabal of assassins known as "star whackers" are out to, you know, whack them. This is, understandably, a tough assertion for the masses to accept. It doesn't mean it's definitely not true, of course — more often than we'd care to acknowledge, claims that at first sound like wild-eyed conspiracy theories do end up containing at least a kernel of truth.

The problem is, Randy and Evi aren't necessarily the best ambassadors for the "star whackers" theory: Their biggest platform to defend the allegations, a lengthy profile in Vanity Fair, ended up just making them sound even crazier than before. So what do you do when the whole world is turning a blind eye to truth? Randy Quaid knows: You co-opt that sadly ignorant world's ingrained communication channels.

Herewith, Randy with his band the Fugitives, rocking the hell out of his new radio jam, "Star Whackers." You get it now, yes?

Randy, 60, denied that he and his wife were on drugs or are mentally unstable.

"To have my integrity and my reputation so denigrated so mercilessly - why?" the Oscar-nominated actor said. "Why would somebody want to do this to me?"...As for their current problems, the pair says a deadly group, who they refer to as "Star Whackers," is attempting to kill them for their money.

Evi, 47, said their alleged assassins could be "an estate planner who would make a living trust and a county that could cash Randy's royalty stream forever."

"They are business men," she continued. "It's the mafia, it's organized crime."

The couple, married since 1989, also claimed that other celebrities may be in danger, including Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears and Mel Gibson.

"I think he was drugged. I think he was slipped a Mickey," Evi said of Gibson.

Even more bizarre, the two attribute the deaths of celebrities such as Heath Ledger (who died from a drug overdose) and David Carradine (who died from accidental asphyxiation) as "flat out fraud."

"It's possible for people to gain control of every facet of your life," he said, adding that he's messed up his relationship with his younger brother, actor Dennis Quaid, who has asked Randy to seek therapy....

LOS ANGELES — Randy Quaid says he would like to return to the United States one day, but he and his wife, Evi, still fear they are being persecuted by California prosecutors and tabloid media.

Although U.S. officials recently refused to seek extradition of the actor and his wife from Canada to face felony vandalism charges in Santa Barbara, Calif., authorities in the coastal town say they'll still have the couple arrested if they return to the states.

The Quaids, who have missed several court appearances in the case, claim they are the victims of corrupt forces and are demanding an investigation.

"I feel like we've been driven out of the country and that the door's been slammed behind us," Quaid, a Houston native, told The Associated Press in a phone interview from British Columbia on Friday. "And for what, these phony little trespassing, vandalism charges? Santa Barbara can sleep better tonight knowing the Quaids are out of their hair."...

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Human Remains is a haunting documentary which illustrates the banality of evil by creating intimate portraits of five of this century’s most reviled dictators. The film unveils the personal lives of Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, Francisco Franco and Mao Tse Tung. We learn the private and mundane details of their everyday lives -- their favorite foods, films, habits and sexual preferences. There is no mention of their public lives or of their place in history. The intentional omission of the horrors for which these men were responsible hovers over the film.

Human Remains addresses this horror from a completely different angle. Irony and even occasional humor are sprinkled throughout the documentary. This darkly poetic film is based entirely on fact, creatively combining direct quotes and biographical research. Though based on historical figures, Human Remains is contemporary in its implications and ultimately invites the viewer to confront the nature of evil.

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

Rep. Alan Grayson asks the Federal Reserve Inspector General about the trillions of dollars lent or spent by the Federal Reserve and where it went, and the trillions of off balance sheet obligations. Inspector General Elizabeth Coleman responds that the IG does not know and is not tracking where this money is.

Oldyoti

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury."~Attributed to Alexander Tytler

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

From the fantastic RSA Animate series comes an illustrated distillation of behavioral economist

Dan Ariely's new book, The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone -- Especially Ourselves

, which you might recall. Here, Ariely highlights some of the fascinating psychological mechanisms that steer our moral compass -- and often do so in directions different from our self-conception as righteous people -- explaining everything from why we cheat on our diets to how the world ended up in a massive financial crisis, and offering lab-tested behavioral insights on what we can do about it all.

If you think about the whole financial crisis, we've taken people and we've put them in situations which basically are guaranteed to blind or, at least, to distort their vision. And we expect people to overcome that.

We all have a tendency to think of people as good or bad. And, we say, as long as we kick the bad people, everything would be fine. But the reality is that we all have the capacity to be quite bad, under the right circumstances, and I think in banking we've created the right circumstances for everybody to misbehave. And, because of that, it's not such a matter of kicking some people and getting new people in -- it's about changing the incentive structure. Because, unless we change that, we're not going to get forward.

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

They beat to death 62-year-old Delfino Mora in an alley in ChicagoMalcolm then posted a sickening video of the attack on Facebook

He has been sentenced to 22 years for first-degree murder and eight years for robbery His two friends are still awaiting trial

By Sophie Jane EvansPUBLISHED: 05:17 EST, 13 September 2013

A 19-year-old man has been sentenced to 30 years in prison for his role in the beating to death of a disabled Chicago man.The brutal crime was captured on video and then posted on Facebook...According to prosecutors, Malcolm was with two other teenagers last July when they decided to play a game called 'Pick 'em out, knock 'em out'.

The three targeted Mr Mora, a father of 12 and grandfather of 23, in an alley in the West Rogers Park neighbourhood and ordered him to empty his pockets.

Malcolm's friend Malik Jones allegedly then punched him in the jaw, causing him to fall to the ground and hit his head on the concrete.

The group then proceeded to rifle through the victim's wallet as he lay dying in the alley.Mr Mora was found by a passer-by with blood on his face and vomit next to his head about three hours later and was taken to hospital.However, he died the next day as a result of blunt head trauma....The one-minute recording of the attack, which was posted on to Facebook, was the most damning piece of evidence presented during the case. Laughter from the three teens charged in the brutal death could be heard on the tape.

Mr Mora, who had been collecting soda cans when he was approached by the youths, had emigrated to Chicago in the 1980s from Michoacán, Mexico.He supplemented his disability payments by collecting the waste cans early in the morning and was attacked just blocks from his home....

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

here something interesting : although I would say the Swiss are more Sociopathic ... Dutch close second ... but of course this is being pushed GLOBALLY by the GLOBALISTS ... EU - UN - World Bank - BIS - their regulations create the value system we are forced to live by .

A libertarian blogger posting about the proposed universal health care in the United States writes:

If the public sector atrophies, the scope for manipulation broadens, because the information about what's available outside the public sector shrinks. Nor is this just crazy speculation. I actually think it's pretty reasonable when conservatives worry that the Dutch attitudes towards euthanasia are influenced by the burden old people and severely disabled children put on the public purse. I don't see how they could fail to be.

What then does a society of sociopaths look like? The Dutch are very efficient, utilitarian, and all of them ride bikes.

They invented several of the world's evils including things like slave trade, diamond trade, and imperialism. They're also very tolerant, traditionally a haven for religious minorities like the soon-to-be American pilgrims. Once you're too old to be functional to society, you kill yourself, always with one eye on the bottom line, e.g. gay okay but old decrepit, not so much. And they're firm believers in the free market. Not so bad, is it? I mean there are tradeoffs in everything, right? ...

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Lewis' youngest son Joseph said in a 1989 interview that he and his five brothers were viciously beaten by their father growing up

'Living with him was pure hell. I've tried drugs. I've tried therapy and the truth still hurts, my father doesn't love me,' said Joseph

Lewis never again spoke to Joseph and refused to pay for his funeral when he died of a heroin overdose in 2009, asking his other sons to keep the death quiet

It was after Joseph's death that Lewis' other sons also began speaking out, with Gary saying: 'Jerry Lewis is a mean and evil person. He was never loving'...Gary, Lewis' oldest son, found fame as a member of the music group Gary Lewis & The Playboys, who had a number one hit back in 1964 with 'This Diamond Ring.'

He too spoke out against his father after his younger brother's death, saying he blamed the man for Joseph's passing....Baby boy: Jerry Lewis with his youngest son Joseph (above in 1964) , who he stopped speaking with in 1989 after he sold a story detailing the beatings he and his brothers received from the funnyman

....Gary told the National Enquirer in a 2010 interview: 'Jerry Lewis is a mean and evil person. He was never loving and caring toward me or my brothers.'...

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5